Would entitlement cuts spark a Democratic civil war?
Looming budget battles could divide the Democratic Party's moderates and liberals


Since President Obama's re-election, the Democratic Party has shown remarkable unity, while Republicans have split chaotically over the fiscal cliff, the debt ceiling debate, and aid for Hurricane Sandy. Democrats for the most part have lined up behind the president's agenda, including nearly unanimously voting to extend the Bush tax cuts for those making more than $400,000 a year, even when many liberals would have preferred the threshold to be $250,000. But as Congress begins talks over a budget deal to lift the debt ceiling, which may involve cuts to entitlement programs, Democratic solidarity will be tested, according to Jonathan Martin and Maggie Haberman at Politico:
[A]lmost as soon as the echo of Obama's inaugural address fades and he becomes a lame duck, Democrats are going to have to face a central and unresolved question about their political identity: Will they become a center-left, Democratic Leadership Council-by-a-different-name party or return to a populist, left-leaning approach that mirrors their electoral coalition?
An immediate answer may come in the entitlement debate and whether Obama and congressional Democrats will agree to any Social Security or Medicare benefit cuts to achieve deficit reduction, said a wide-ranging group of Democratic elected officials and strategists.
"In the short term that's the flash point," said longtime Democratic consultant Paul Begala. [Politico]
The Democratic Party has plenty of progressive members in Congress, or what you might call traditional Democrats: Pro-union, anti-Wall Street, big-government. Then there are lawmakers cut in the mold of the above-cited DLC, a group led by Bill Clinton that pushed the party to the center and tried to moderate its tax-and-spend reputation. Indeed, it could be argued that the GOP, though splintering in highly public fashion, is more ideologically coherent — its divisions come from being out of power. As Charles Krauthammer at The Washington Post writes:
It has become conventional wisdom that Republicans are suffering an internal split that President Obama is successfully exploiting to neuter the Republican House. It is not true, however, that the Republican split is philosophical and fundamental. And that a hopelessly divided GOP is therefore headed for decline, perhaps irrelevance.
In fact, the split is tactical, not philosophical; short-term, not fundamental. [Washington Post]
However, let's remember that ideological diversity within a party is generally a good thing. As Martin and Haberman point out, it's actually the inevitable result of a party that is expanding. One could argue that the Democratic debate between liberals (who want to defend the safety net) and the center-left pragmatists (who want to reform those programs to cut the budget deficit) essentially reflects the debate the country as a whole is having about entitlements.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
Furthermore, the divide within the Democratic Party doesn't have to be reduced to an either/or proposition. The debate is not going to end with Bill Clinton vaunting like Achilles over the corpse of Elizabeth Warren. The Democratic Party can live with these tensions, much like Obama himself has done, expanding Medicaid while proposing Social Security cuts, fighting for unemployment benefits while eliminating federal jobs. It is, as Obama so often to likes to say, a balanced approach to governing.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Ryu Spaeth is deputy editor at TheWeek.com. Follow him on Twitter.
-
George Floyd: Did Black Lives Matter fail?
Feature The momentum for change fades as the Black Lives Matter Plaza is scrubbed clean
-
National debt: Why Congress no longer cares
Feature Rising interest rates, tariffs and Trump's 'big, beautiful' bill could sent the national debt soaring
-
Why are military experts so interested in Ukraine's drone attack?
TODAY'S BIG QUESTION The Zelenskyy government's massive surprise assault on Russian airfields was a decisive tactical victory — could it also be the start of a new era in autonomous warfare?
-
The JFK files: the truth at last?
In The Spotlight More than 64,000 previously classified documents relating the 1963 assassination of John F. Kennedy have been released by the Trump administration
-
'Seriously, not literally': how should the world take Donald Trump?
Today's big question White House rhetoric and reality look likely to become increasingly blurred
-
Will Trump's 'madman' strategy pay off?
Today's Big Question Incoming US president likes to seem unpredictable but, this time round, world leaders could be wise to his playbook
-
Democrats vs. Republicans: who are the billionaires backing?
The Explainer Younger tech titans join 'boys' club throwing money and support' behind President Trump, while older plutocrats quietly rebuke new administration
-
US election: where things stand with one week to go
The Explainer Harris' lead in the polls has been narrowing in Trump's favour, but her campaign remains 'cautiously optimistic'
-
Is Trump okay?
Today's Big Question Former president's mental fitness and alleged cognitive decline firmly back in the spotlight after 'bizarre' town hall event
-
The life and times of Kamala Harris
The Explainer The vice-president is narrowly leading the race to become the next US president. How did she get to where she is now?
-
Will 'weirdly civil' VP debate move dial in US election?
Today's Big Question 'Diametrically opposed' candidates showed 'a lot of commonality' on some issues, but offered competing visions for America's future and democracy